CTNF 18/940,927 CTNF 85956 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 5/11/2026 is acknowledged. As Applicant did not traverse the restriction requirement, it is hereby deemed proper and made FINAL. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-3, 5, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Tamura et al. (JP H10-231182) . Regarding claim 1, Tamura teaches a ceramic fastener (¶¶ 1, 9) comprising a bolt head and a threaded portion (¶ 38). The fastener comprises a main body formed of inorganic long fibers as reinforcing material and a ceramic matrix (¶ 38), corresponding to the claimed inner portion. A plurality of stacked alignment layers covers the surface of the main body (¶ 40), and correspond to the claimed outer portion. The inorganic long fibers may be made of alumina (¶ 27), and the ceramic matrix is an oxide comprising alumina, silica, strontium oxide, and/or barium oxide (¶ 31). The alignment layers similarly comprise inorganic long fibers (¶ 46) and are impregnated with the same ceramic matrix (see ¶ 56). Regarding claim 2, the stacked alignment layers extend circumferentially around the main body (¶ 47). Regarding claim 3, because there is a plurality of stacked alignment layers (¶ 40), the innermost of these could be considered part of the claimed “inner portion”. Tamura teaches these alignment layers are wound spirally (¶ 46). Regarding claim 5, the threaded portion of Tamura is cylindrical (see Fig. 1) and therefore has a rolled shape. Regarding claim 7, Tamura teaches a composite nut having a similar construction as the fastener for engaging the fastener (¶¶ 49, 82). Regarding claim 8, the outermost layer of the stacked alignment layer can be considered the claimed “outer portion” and thus represents one continuous piece . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura et al. (JP H10-231182) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Peters et al. (US 2016/0169261) . Regarding claim 4, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed above. Tamura does not expressly teach the bolt head comprises a tapered portion, but teaches the body of the fastener includes a screw thread (¶ 17). Peters teaches a ceramic fastener having a head which flares outward from the base (¶ 23). Peters also teaches the other end of the fastener may similarly flare outwards (¶ 23). It would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the fastener of Tamura with a tapered head, as taught by Peters, because the prior art establishes this is a known configuration for a fastener and it is readily apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that a tapered head permits a fastener to sit flush with the material it is fastened into, such that parts of the fastener are not sticking out from the material. Regarding claim 9, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed above. Tamura does not expressly disclose an intermediary collar disposed on the shank and a nut for engaging the intermediary collar. Peters teaches a ceramic fastener assembly (¶ 21) having threads which are separate from the fastener and are attachable thereto (¶ 23). These threads correspond to the claimed intermediary collar. The threads in Peters are configured to engage with a nut (¶ 24). It would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to further include an intermediary collar to the ceramic composite fastener of Tamura, as taught by Peters, because the assembly of Peters is a known arrangement in the prior art which permits the fastener to have features which carry the torque of tightening and loosening (¶ 23), as well as creating self-locking features (¶ 24), or having crack resistant properties (¶ 32) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura et al. (JP H10-231182) . Regarding claim 6, the limitations of claim 5 have been addressed above. Because there is a plurality of stacked alignment layers (¶ 40), the innermost of these could be considered part of the claimed “inner portion”. Tamura teaches these alignment layers are wound spirally (¶ 46) with an angle offset of more than 0° and at most 60° (¶ 43). This overlaps the claimed range, creating a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura et al. (JP H10-231182), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Dunn (US 5,090,857) . Regarding claims 9-10, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed above. Tamura does not expressly teach the intermediary collar disposed on the shank and a nut for engaging the intermediary collar. Dunn teaches a ceramic composite fastener having an externally threaded split collar secured to the shank of the fastener (col. 2, lines 38-43). It would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the fastener of Tamura to have an externally threaded split collar because the assembly of a split collar for the fastener permits tension loads to be applied to the fastener without damaging the ceramic (col. 2, lines 9-35). As the fastener of Tamura includes a ceramic composite nut to engage with the threads of the fastener, the combination of Tamura with Dunn would suggest a nut engaging with the threads of the intermediary collar . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura et al. (JP H10-231182) in view of Peters et al. (US 2016/0169261), as applied to claim 9, further in view of Dunn (US 5,090,857) . Regarding claim 10, the limitations of claim 9 have been addressed above. Tamura in view of Peters does not expressly teach the intermediary collar is a split ring threaded sleeve. Dunn teaches a ceramic composite fastener having an externally threaded split collar secured to the shank of the fastener (col. 2, lines 38-43). It would have been obvious at the effective time of filing for the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the threads of Peters to have a split collar because the assembly of a split collar for the fastener permits tension loads to be applied to the fastener without damaging the ceramic (see Dunn col. 2, lines 9-35) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pinney (US 2021/0095711) teaches a threaded collar for ceramic fasteners. Tschantz (US 2010/0189528) teaches a split ring threaded sleeve collar for ceramic fasteners . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIAOBEI WANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5705. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent- center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /XIAOBEI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1784 Application/Control Number: 18/940,927 Page 2 Art Unit: 1784 Application/Control Number: 18/940,927 Page 3 Art Unit: 1784 Application/Control Number: 18/940,927 Page 4 Art Unit: 1784 Application/Control Number: 18/940,927 Page 5 Art Unit: 1784 Application/Control Number: 18/940,927 Page 6 Art Unit: 1784 Application/Control Number: 18/940,927 Page 7 Art Unit: 1784
Prosecution Insights